Arrowhead Regional Corrections Board v. Graff

321 N.W.2d 53, 1982 Minn. LEXIS 1621
Supreme Court of Minnesota·Decided July 2, 1982·No. 51736·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Judge of the Aitkin County Court, fired his probation officer by order pursuant to Minn.Stat. § 260.311, subd. 1(1) (1978), which provides for court appointment of probation officers “to serve during the pleasure of the court.” Respondent, Arrowhead Regional Corrections Board, established by Aitkin and five other counties under Minn.Stat. § 401.01 et seq. (1978) (Community Corrections Act) and Minn. Stat. § 471.59 (1978) (Joint Powers Act), sought a declaratory judgment that appel-. lant’s order be declared void in violation of respondent’s and its employees’ contractual and statutory employment rights. The trial court, upon stipulated facts, found appellant’s order invalid as “contrary to the employment agreement and collective bargaining agreement that exists between [the probation officer] and his employer Arrowhead Regional Corrections Board.”

Affirmance of the trial court ruling is controlled by General Drivers, Local # 346, for Itself and on Behalf of Dennis Murdock v. Aitkin County Board, et al., 320 N.W.2d 695 (Minn.1982). A county court’s authority to discharge probation officers under section 260.311, subd. 1(1) is modified by Minn.Stat. § 179.63, subd. 4 (1980) and is subject to the employee’s rights under the collective bargaining agreement negotiated pursuant to the Public Employees Labor Relations Act.

Affirmed.

KELLEY, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Arrowhead Regional Corrections Board v. Graff, 321 N.W.2d 53, 1982 Minn. LEXIS 1621 (Mich. 1982).

321 N.W.2d 53 (Arrowhead Regional Corrections Board v. Graff) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

General Drivers, Local 346 v. Aitkin County Board
320 N.W.2d 695 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1982)